@Scollurio
My guess is that the Wii U launch would have been better if the 3DS had done better. The 3DS costed about $100 to make at launch, so it's possible they thought people would upgrade pretty quickly knowing that their DS brand was popular and there were already tons of games on that.
They expected people to buy the 3DS for the upgraded visuals and features not possible on the DS, while still expecting people to demand just as many games they had on DS. The price point on the 3DS being at $250 probably would have gotten through the slow launch faster, but no one saw the need to upgrade so quickly, so it's been pretty recent that the 3DS has been successful.
Nintendo just got ahead of themselves, and were probably planning on using 3DS $250 sales to push the Wii U harder. That's not right for 3DS owners in a sense, because they're buying a handheld at top dollar to push a console they won't have.
Either way, Nintendo fixed the issues, and I think the Wii U will pick up similarly to the 3DS. Also, add that the 3DS and Wii U are actually capable of cross play and such, making it very likely we will have an account system soon. That will attract more companies to put a game on Nintendo consoles, because linking game handhelds and consoles adds more to the appeal than just game sharing and account transfers.
They could even let us download play an entire game from different consoles(the Wii U acting as a local hub) as a form of game sharing, which wouldn't be internet related at all.

I have no clue what you mean by Nintendo using the 3DS to help sell WiiUs. If there is any correlation, it is more likely that potential buyers saw the 3DS got a big price cut shortly after launch, and thought the WiiU might too.

@willobee
Meh. I don't know. The difference between the 3DS, is that they were selling(and still are) it for profit. They make $70-100 off of each 3DS sale, plus whatever software sales go along with that, which is always at least 1, usually.
The Wii U literally costs $350, straight up. The profit they are making off the 3DS right now, is most likely being used to keep the Wii U from being a failure. It's not a bad thing, really. They just aren't ready to push the Wii U until the fall, it seems like, when the OS is complete and the games we've been waiting for, come out.
I think we're most likely to see another 3DS price drop before a Wii U price drop, but not until the Wii U picks up. That's most likely the time when they'll merge their portable and console systems, if at all. It would make sense to me if they combine the accounts of both their systems, then do a price drop on the 3DS. Wii U owners would most likely buy a 3DS to take advantage of the linking ability, assuming VC and whatever else are immediately link enabled.

They literally can't lower the price on Wii U consoles at this point, because they're selling it at face value.

@willobee
Meh. I don't know. The difference between the 3DS, is that they were selling(and still are) it for profit. They make $70-100 off of each 3DS sale, plus whatever software sales go along with that, which is always at least 1, usually.
The Wii U literally costs $350, straight up. The profit they are making off the 3DS right now, is most likely being used to keep the Wii U from being a failure. It's not a bad thing, really. They just aren't ready to push the Wii U until the fall, it seems like, when the OS is complete and the games we've been waiting for, come out.
I think we're most likely to see another 3DS price drop before a Wii U price drop, but not until the Wii U picks up. That's most likely the time when they'll merge their portable and console systems, if at all. It would make sense to me if they combine the accounts of both their systems, then do a price drop on the 3DS. Wii U owners would most likely buy a 3DS to take advantage of the linking ability, assuming VC and whatever else are immediately link enabled.

They literally can't lower the price on Wii U consoles at this point, because they're selling it at face value.

Nintendo has 8 billion in the bank, the 3DS doesn't make the Wii U a faliure or not and Nintendo could still support Wii U without it. How on earth any console is supposed to keep the other form being a failure is beyond me. The 3DS's sucess is completely unrealated to the Wii U's.

@Jaz007
It's possible they could be using the 3DS revenue to buy more time for the Wii U. The Wii U is still waiting for games, and it's final OS.
If Nintendo NEVER had a portable gaming system, do you really think they would be as successful as they are with either of those consoles? The 3DS wouldn't have existed without the Game & Watch.
When their consoles are going slow, their portables pickup the slack, and vice versa sometimes.
The 3DS doesn't DIRECTLY effect the stance of the Wii U, but it does still effect it.
If the 3DS is doing bad, do you really think Nintendo is thinking, 'Ahh, don't worry about it! We got the Wii U right here!'?

@Jaz007
It's possible they could be using the 3DS revenue to buy more time for the Wii U. The Wii U is still waiting for games, and it's final OS.
If Nintendo NEVER had a portable gaming system, do you really think they would be as successful as they are? The 3DS wouldn't have existed without the Game & Watch.
When their consoles are going slow, their portables pickup the slack, and vice versa sometimes.
The 3DS doesn't DIRECTLY effect the stance of the Wii U, but it does still effect it.
If the 3DS is doing bad, do you really think Nintendo is thinking, 'Ahh, don't worry about it! We got the Wii U right here!'

So your suggesting Nintendo might go third-party if they didn't have 3DS?

@Jaz007
It's possible they could be using the 3DS revenue to buy more time for the Wii U. The Wii U is still waiting for games, and it's final OS.
If Nintendo NEVER had a portable gaming system, do you really think they would be as successful as they are? The 3DS wouldn't have existed without the Game & Watch.
When their consoles are going slow, their portables pickup the slack, and vice versa sometimes.
The 3DS doesn't DIRECTLY effect the stance of the Wii U, but it does still effect it.
If the 3DS is doing bad, do you really think Nintendo is thinking, 'Ahh, don't worry about it! We got the Wii U right here!'

So your suggesting Nintendo might go third-party if they didn't have 3DS?

Not really. I mean, if Nintendo's hardware was really doing that bad, I'm certain they would go 3rd party. The fact is, is that isn't the situation.
Like you said, they have $8 billion in the bank. It would be pretty hard for Nintendo to mess up badly enough to just disappear.

@Jaz007
It's possible they could be using the 3DS revenue to buy more time for the Wii U. The Wii U is still waiting for games, and it's final OS.
If Nintendo NEVER had a portable gaming system, do you really think they would be as successful as they are? The 3DS wouldn't have existed without the Game & Watch.
When their consoles are going slow, their portables pickup the slack, and vice versa sometimes.
The 3DS doesn't DIRECTLY effect the stance of the Wii U, but it does still effect it.
If the 3DS is doing bad, do you really think Nintendo is thinking, 'Ahh, don't worry about it! We got the Wii U right here!'

So your suggesting Nintendo might go third-party if they didn't have 3DS?

Not really. I mean, if Nintendo's hardware was really doing that bad, I'm certain they would go 3rd party. The fact is, is that isn't the situation.
Like you said, they have $8 billion in the bank. It would be pretty hard for Nintendo to mess up badly enough to just disappear.

So if they woudn't go third-party then how does the 3DS affect the Wii U if Nintendo would just take the losses and still support the Wii U? Therefore it's not affecting the Wii U from being a faliure or sucess with the revenue it brings.

@Jaz007
That's right. It could be the GCN all over again in a worse case scenario. The difference is, is that 3DS still costs more than a GBA.
GBA cost $100 at launch, assuming $70 to make the actual device. How much were new SNES consoles selling for back then?
NOW, the 3DS costs $170.
The 3DS costs more than a GBA, even when the GBA was new.
The exact opposite happened in GBA/GCN days, where they lowered the price on the GCN, but the GBA never got a price drop.
Then DS and Wii came out.
This whole business is literally like a relay. You run as far as you can, then pass on the torch to the next person.
Every single time Nintendo releases a new system, it picks up EXACTLY where the last one left off.
EDIT:The progress made technologically between console generations is very literal, and that's why Sega died.
They had a perfectly good Genesis right there, but decided to add the Sega CD. That didn't do so good, so that's most likely what caused to Nintendo back out of the same exact kind of deal with Sony.
Then Saturn came out. Fail. The Dreamcast. Fail.
Sega panicked, and thought they could make more revenue by releasing more hardware.
Nintendo is in the exact same situation right now, except they aren't going to release a new system in 4 years like Sega. Maybe an add-on, but not an add-on that is pretty irrelevant. The software will do the work on a perfectly fine machine.

@Jaz007
That's right. It could be the GCN all over again in a worse case scenario. The difference is, is that 3DS still costs more than a GBA.
GBA cost $100 at launch, assuming $70 to make the actual device. How much were new SNES consoles selling for back then?
NOW, the 3DS costs $170.
The 3DS costs more than a GBA, even when the GBA was new.
The exact opposite happened in GBA/GCN days, where they lowered the price on the GCN, but the GBA never got a price drop.
Then DS and Wii came out.
This whole business is literally like a relay. You run as far as you can, then pass on the torch to the next person.
Every single time Nintendo releases a new system, it picks up EXACTLY where the last one left off.

You make a console, let it run it's course, then release the next one. Everybody does that. What does that have to do with anything we just talked about?

Sega could have continued making hardware, if they would have just simply skipped the Saturn, and released a weaker Dreamcast earlier.
The main problem with the N64 was no discs. At this point, Sega had already had 3 disc consoles out.
Sega could have released a console ONE year after, or on the same year of the N64 with PSOne type discs, and be slightly more powerful. That would have made Nintendo look like an idiot, and they would have lost.
My point in saying this, is that Nintendo is has been staying relevant. The only company that could have killed Nintendo is Sega, and they aren't around HARDWARE wise anymore.

Exactly. That's why it's ridiculous to suggest Nintendo is being an idiot when it comes to Wii U.

You've chaned the subject completely again. That has nothing to do with anything. What is that suppose even mean. Nobody suggested anything. You can't respond to a discussion by saying something that has nothing to do with the dicussion at hand in anyway.

Don't worry about it. The OP was about making Wii U free anyway.
Nintendo's already selling the Wii U for face value. I'm sorry, but the price can't be any lower than $350. If you can't afford a Wii U, it looks like you're gonna be stuck with the Xbox 360 or PS3 until a price drop, which looks to be coming at the beginning of 2015 at the earliest.
If you can't afford $350, it's guaranteed you won't be able to afford the PS4 or Xbox One.